Broadcasting critiques.......

« **on:** February 02, 2005, 03:37:47 PM »

I was reading some reader's comments on soccernet.com, concerning the broadcaster's inability to describe a shot on goal.

It went thus:

"You may regard this as pedantic but I don't think it is. When your reporters mix these terms up they are showing their ignorance of the game. John O'Shea's goal last night was an exquisite chip. The ball was on the floor not in mid air after a bounce as he struck it. He dug his foot underneath the ball causing back spin rather than delicately pushing the ball forward after it has bounced, as you would do with a lob."
A N Other

Have you found yourself screaming with frustration when our golf TV fellas cannot discern the difference from a chip or pitch, even a draw or fade? Does Mike Tirico(sp) come to mind?

« **Reply #1 on:** February 02, 2005, 03:40:33 PM »

Bob -- coincidental you should bring up Tirico...I caught a VERY little bit of the Chrysler (BORING!!!!!) and was thinking how bad ABC's coverage is....I think they are a distant third between NBC and CBS

« **Reply #2 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:14:21 PM »

Dave,

Oops, you may well be right, but once in a while they can even balls that up.

« **Reply #3 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:28:30 PM »

Bob,
If you question and Dave's response do not remind us that some of the artistry that remains in football and is gone from golf, I do not know what will.

Sadly, I do not think the American sports media have taken many lessons from Henry Blofeld, whose words on the radio can make a game as thrilling as watching it live.

« **Reply #4 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:33:13 PM »

Shivas-most shots on TV are 10-25 putts that go in
(that should have been preceded by the words"moments ago")
Unless it's The Masters,at least 1/2 the coverage is commercials or sponsor blather,so they have great opportunity to pass "highlights"(or what they perceive as important)off as live
Kind've like watching the Sportscenter NBA highlights(if there are such a thing) and watching how many 23 footers were made the night before

« **Reply #5 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:40:42 PM »

Ian Baker-Finch reacting to a tee shot that finishes ANYWHERE in the fairway: "That's absolutely perfect."

It's just lazy commentary...

« **Reply #6 on:** February 02, 2005, 04:41:33 PM »

Shivas,

So true. There is also the variant often used on many parkland courses.

The announcer might need to say " A full sand wedge will not be enough. He will have to hit a wedge."

Well, there you have it.

« **Reply #7 on:** February 02, 2005, 05:07:33 PM »

ESPN beats em all. Just ask Charlie.

« **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2005, 05:57:53 PM »

I enjoy CBS the most, excited to see their coverage this weekend.
Johnny Miller tends to annoy me. I find his flamboyant nature irritating after awhile. This really gets to me at the Players, that and the constant #17 coverage.

I enjoy David F on CBS.. Lanny is getting better. I generally enjoy their coveage of the course more as well.

« **Reply #9 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:01:52 PM »

What about Nicklaus in the booth:

"I had that same putt earlier"

« **Reply #10 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:59:28 PM »

How many times have you heard the word "lengthy" in a golf broadcast?

Or someone describe "a great golf shot" in exactly those terms?

Thanks - thought I was watching pool there for a minute...

Don't we have the USGA to blame for the "hole location" talk? Or was that Hootie?

As for favorite networks, I usually prefer CBS, but even Jim Nantz can sometimes pull out some gag-worthy phrases when trying to be poetic.

And for my hypocrisy, apologies to those I probably just offended who call it "billiards."

« **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2005, 07:06:58 PM »

Lighten up, its just a game. Why should they be held to a higher standard than the august network news departments?
The mute button is a very useful tool.

« **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2005, 08:07:00 PM »

They are all bad all of the time. Any insight that may leak out during the course of a broadcast comes about purely by accident.

The same is true for the national television coverage of baseball, football and college basketball (I consider the NBA beneath contempt). I think the reason is that the networks always want to appeal to what they perceive as the "average" fan. They know they will get the die hards and hard core guys tuning in no matter what so they want to appeal to the lowest common denominator. The networks live in mortal fear of having their broadcasters talk over the heads of or being too technical for the "average" guy.

« **Reply #13 on:** February 02, 2005, 11:23:02 PM »

A buddy and I are pitching a show to ESPN where we will sit in big recliners, watch clips and listen to commentors, and then critisize the stupid announcers.

"He came to play today!!"

« **Reply #14 on:** February 03, 2005, 12:04:48 AM »

Bob,

TV has brought about the demise of both the written and spoken word when covering sporting events.

Gone are the days when I would listen to Lon Simmons, Russ Hodges or Hank Greenwall broadcasting the sights and sounds of SF Giants Baseball, waxing poetically about the game from yesteryear.

Gone are the days of Bill King, with his excellant prose doing the San Francisco Warriors and Oakland Raiders.

Gone are the days of the national sportswriter, gosh I can't even remember any, covering a Giants vs. Dodgers game, and given explicit detail of the nuances of the game, you could almost feel the dirt kicked into your face when Maury Wills stole second base or the Juan Marichal fastball buzzed by your noggin' for digging in at the plate.

Today, we have sound bites and short, cryptic US Today type articles that inform us of the facts but don't allow us to see the event through the words of the author.

Mike

« **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2005, 02:51:08 AM »

One knows one has spent too much time in the UK when one can understand all of Peter McKnight's comments above.......

« **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:23:51 AM »

PETEMC,
I think I am in heaven....a fellow Red on this site..how good can life get.
I am living here in the Us but still a season ticket holder and shareholder .
Tuesday was awesome, what a game..the best of what soccer can be..starting with Keano laying the boot in, in the tunnel awesome..Giggs was superb again, playing the best stuff of his career, and once again Rio was a rock at the back.
I watched Chelski last night hang on for 3 more points..it hurst to say but they have been the best tean this season and deserve the title...it's better than the gooners winning it anyway..but only for one year!!
We need two players..another 'Keane' like midfielder and a relaible guy between the sticks.
Although I really believe Smith could fill the midfield role.

Anyway back to the thread.......
How many times can you hear "that's in the mayor's office" from Baker Finch...and will he ever say anything that you can consider controversial..all I can say is please more Faldo..the guy is brilliant on the air..offering humour/experience and techincal expertise.

Cantona is the King!!!!

« **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:23:58 AM »

Quote from: Rich Goodale on February 03, 2005, 02:51:08 AM

One knows one has spent too much time in the UK when one can understand all of Peter McKnight's comments above.......

Or that as an American living here, one is WAY WAY WAY too into football (soccer).

Unbelievably I understood 95% of it - just some of the players were beyond me.

God I watch way too much FA Cup and Prem league on Fox Sports World...

« **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:31:51 AM »

Tom,
I knew there was something about you that I liked!!

« **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:35:42 AM »

this thread triggered this thought, which I had thought I had permanently repressed: remember when Brent Musberger announced golf? he got to conduct the (often painful-to-watch) Butler Cabin with Jack after the 86 masters!

of all the announcers who could have had that privilege, it was he!

when Jack had to withdraw from the 86 Masters with a bad back, he asked Jack if they could push back his tee time...apparently Jack just kind of laughed....

although, I could swear that I remember reading that the USGA actually did push back one of Hogan's tee times when he had a bad back in the 50's, but he still couldn't go and had to withdraw

« **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:37:56 AM »

Michael, I really don't know why I am so into soccer (using the American vernacular) but I just kinda always have been... My family gives me endless crap for watching games in Spanish... yes, I do that also... sometimes Univision is the only way to get the games we want here... But UK football has always been my fave - I think it's the crowds and all the chanting and singing that gets me... one of my goals is to someday see a game at Old Trafford or one of the other classic stadiums, never have done that.

In any case, now that my kids play - and my 9 year old daughter just tried out for and made a competitive travelling team, god help me - the addiction is even greater.

I am sadly not that up to speed on which side has which players... but for an American watching from afar, well.. I'd guess I know more than most.

I just don't have a side to call my own... you might cease having reason to like me, but Chelsea intrigues me... but I have friends also who are die-hard Arsenal, which makes me want to favor ManU.... and damn I love the name Tottenham Hotspur, as I have butchered in here before...

Oh well. It's still fun to follow even without the team devotion.

TH

« **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:42:24 AM »

If you make the wise man's choice.... and that of course would be manu....
I will get you a ticket to O.T for a game..but if you go to the dark side and choose the "Stienbrenner Style Chelski" forget it!!!!

With the Copa Libatodories about to start..Univision will be our only source..actually I think it will be Fox en espanol

« **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2005, 10:43:31 AM »

Well now Michael that seems perfectly reasonable to me. ManU it is. I just had the impression that THEY were more like our baseball Yankees than most other clubs... that is richest, spending most... please set me straight. The ins and outs of who does what by each side are lost on me for the most part also.

OT... some day.....

« **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2005, 11:02:49 AM »

Well as afr as the Yankee connection goes here is the difference.
United are a Plc and as such have to balance the books..yes their fan base and merchandising make them the largest club in the world, but they still have to balance the books.
Chelski however are not in the same situation, Abrahmovic has very deep pockets that do not require any supplementation..in fact the latest figures show that Chelski have just shown the worst fiscal deficit in English football history over the past 12 months.
There in lies the difference.
Now as a manu fan we cannot complain, because until the Ruski came along we were the "bullies" with the deepest pockets..but at least that was based on a fiscally even playing field.

« **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2005, 11:11:12 AM »

Michael - many thanks. That makes perfect sense to me.

I gather Mr. Huntley favors Chelsea? I'd be interested in his words on this subject.

News:

Bob_Huntley

PThomas

Bob_Huntley

Ben Cowan-Dewar

jeffwarne

CHrisB

john_stiles

Mike_Young

Jfaspen

John_Cullum

Brian_Sleeman

peter_p

David Kelly

Craig Sweet

Mike Benham

ForkaB

Michael Wharton-Palmer

THuckaby2

Michael Wharton-Palmer

PThomas

THuckaby2

Michael Wharton-Palmer

THuckaby2

Michael Wharton-Palmer

THuckaby2

An Error Has Occurred!